Blog 4 History

I haven’t seen a lot of these, and of the few I have, this one is a fairly representative one. I am not aware of the practice of writing KIA letters as a prominent occurrence, especially by the year 1863. It’s interesting how with just minor changes, this could have been a letter written during WW2 or any other 20th Century war. This letter represents the “Good Death” KIA correspondence. Not uncommon, especially with WW2 and Vietnam.

Regardless of fact, each letter sent home to loved ones regarding the death of a comrade, always involved the establishment of associating death with “quick” and “painless,” and “noble” or “heroic.”

This letter written by Melvin B Ross, a lieutenant in Henshaw’s light artillery to James Wheeler notifying him that his son Daniel Wheeler was killed in action. Wheeler, a resident of Freedom Illinois, was one of two members of Henshaw’s light artillery who was killed at the battle of Campbell’s Station, Tennessee on November 16, 1863:

Headquarters
Henshaw’s Battery 2nd Brigade
2nd Division
23d Army Corps
Knoxville , Tenn

Dec. 5th 1863.
James Wheeler Esq.

Dear Sir,
It is with most painful feeling that I sit down to impart to you the sad tidengs that Daniel has fallen. He was instantly killed by the explosion of a shell at the battle of Campbell’s Station Nov 16th. He fell while doing his duty manfully and I can truly say that we have met a loss that every member of this battery feels deeply. He was universally esteemed by both officers and men possessing the confidence of all. We have been besieged here in this place for nineteen days but the rebels left last night. The mailman is at my door now so I have time to write no more. Yours Truly, M.B. Ross.

Edward Winslow (1595 – 1655) was a Pilgrim of the Mayflower and a leader of sorts. He served as the governor of Plymouth Colony in 1633, 1636, and finally in 1644. I mention him as in 1624 he published “Good Newes from New England, or a True Relation of Things very Remarkable at the Plantation of Plimouth in New England” which detailed not just the history of the first Pilgrims, but also things concerning the local natives. In particular, Winslow described an experience of his while taking a walk along an Indian trial full of interesting landmarks, though they were much more than that. The Indians he was speaking of were the Pokanokets, and, I think you will find their attempt at preserving their heritage and history of interest, to say the least. Edward Winslow describes what he saw, p. 62:

Instead of records and chronicles, they take this course, where any remarkable act is done, in memory of it, either in the place, or by some pathway near adjoining, they make a round hole in the ground about a foot deep, and as much over, which when others passing by behold, they inquire the cause and occasion of the same, which being once known, they are careful to acquaint all men, as occasion serveth therewith. And least such holes should be filled, or grown up by any accident, as men pass by they will oft renew the same: by which means many things of great antiquity are fresh in memory. So that as a man travelleth, if he can understand his guide, his journey will be the less tedious, by reason of the many historical discourses will be related unto him.

Using these “Memory Holes” they could share important events (history) with others and more specifically future generations. The Pokanokets seem to have expressed an understanding that preserving their heritage was essential to maintain a cohesiveness and unity. To survive, culturally and intellectually. Something that might be food for thought today, especially for us educators.

-Chris

This irks me, no it angers me. These pirates of history who sell Civil War letters on Ebay to the highest bidder are disgusting. This is one of the few times capitalism bothers me. The private collectors horde history in personal collections away from historians and researchers, to marvel at as it hangs on their walls or lines their bookshelves. Yes, some historians and collectors purchase these letters for research and common good. But I have a hard time imagining many historians can afford these prices on a consistent basis:

60 CIVIL WAR LETTERS Member 7th MICHIGAN CAVALRY, countdiscula (how nice) is the seller and the collection sold for: $5,200.00

7 Civil War Soldier Letters 22nd MA Infantry 1863, $900

And there is more. Often individual letters sell for $150 or more, sometimes hundreds of dollars if the content is battle related.

I have to admit that for some time now, months, I have intentionally stopped posting political statements or overtly expressing my political beliefs on this blog.

For several reasons I have decided to cease with political blogging: First, as in the classroom, my words here are taken seriously by young people. I have students who might read this blog and I can influence them. Yes, being a positive influence is the goal, but by ranting political points of view, am I violating that trust factor with students? This was my question to myself. As I see it, I need to keep this blog focused and free from political rants, much like I do in the classroom.

Second, I have always felt that as an educator it is my duty to develop “thinkers,” and not simply expressions of my political or social beliefs. If I continually made rants in my classroom about the Iraq War, my feelings about Bush (or any other candidate), then I feel I am doing a disservice to my students. I am potentially influencing them to “believe” and “think” like me, and that is wrong in my humble opinion. As teachers our students will look up to us, and that can be a license for some to influence their students in ways that are simply not appropriate.

Yes, one can say that as long as I have a safe classroom and students feel safe in expressing viewpoints counter to mine, then I can stimulate discussion. In a college classroom, maybe, but in a high school classroom, students who disagree will more often than not be intimated and will close themselves off to me as a teacher.

This is not to say that political discussion is off limits in my classroom, it is not. Only I do not inject myself into it. I play the role of the mediator and allow students to debate, express beliefs, ask questions, and I do so from the point of view of a moderator. Like at any political debate, I ask questions, offer facts, information, and guidance; I do not allow myself to become an “influence” on a child when it comes to their social, political, or religious beliefs. This does not mean I will not challenge a student if I feel they have missed something in their argument or are presenting something utterly irrational.

I have no doubts that some of you may say, “Yeah, right.” But this is how it is. I want my students to consider, think, act, and do so on their own accord. That is how I can contribute to the betterment of this country as an educator.

So my question is, “Should educators such as myself, express political viewpoints in the classroom, or even here on a blog (one that students read)?” This may indeed be asking two different questions, but perhaps that is the point. Is it really two different things?

——-

This post was a reflection from my readings of some of what Brooks Simpson has written in response to Kevin Levin political (for lack of a better word) blogging of late. Both historians I respect immensely.

Recently I have been looking through a few books that have arrived (or been on the To Be Read Stack).

First, Allen C. Guelzo’s Lincoln and Douglas: The Debates that Defined America. As a simpleton high school history teacher I am enjoying the careful development of Guelzo’s thesis as it centers on the nature of these debates and their representative aspect in understanding the social and political culture of the 1850s.

In 1858, the Lincoln and Douglas debates captured and enraptured America’s attention and consciousness over the issue of slavery. The debates were not just a representation of America’s mood and disposition, but also a reflection of the social element of the time period.

It would be difficult for most Americans today to imagine spending an entire evening listening to political discourse. It would be almost unfathomable to imagine this as a form of entertainment and enlightenment. In so many ways, the debates of 1858 are a perfect representation of American culture on the eve of the Civil War.

I have noted many times my belief that as teachers we have to be very careful with our presentation of Lincoln and the race issue. It is very easy to take something like the following quote (1858, Ottawa) and immediately condemn Lincoln:

“I will say here, while upon this subject, that I have no purpose directly or indirectly to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so. I have no purpose to introduce political and social equality between the white and the black races. There is a physical difference between the two, which in my judgment will probably forever forbid their living together upon the footing of perfect equality, and inasmuch as it becomes a necessity that there must be a difference, I, as well as Judge Douglas, am in favor of the race to which I belong, having the superior position.”

Parts of this quote have been used countless times in efforts to dismiss Lincoln as a racist and white supremist. Indeed, Lincoln was a racist and white supremist in every modern definition and understanding of the term; which is precisely the problem.

We have to take Lincoln on his own terms and view him within the environment that he was created in. If we can remove emotion and today’s standards of justice and moral understanding, then we can view his very next comment (after the above) with some enlightenment:

“I have never said anything to the contrary, but I hold that notwithstanding all this, there is no reason in the world why the Negro is not entitled to all the natural rights enumerated in the Declaration of Independence, the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

Lincoln was a progressive thinker and was always consistent in his desire to stop slavery’s expansion and his hatred for the institution.

Slavery’s existence in the United States in 1858 was a complicated issue that would take a lot of study for us today to even attempt to understand. I own the 1953 Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln and I have spent time reading the speeches and writings, and I can say that to truly do justice to Lincoln you have to not only read his words, but understand the context of them. This is where too many high school history teachers do an injustice to perhaps our greatest President.

Winston Churchill’s The Second World War, Vol. 1: The Gathering Storm was a great read as I was prepping for my U.S. History B section, where we start with World War II. For me, I do not know if you can teach the tragedy that is WWII well without reading at least a little of Winston Churchill.

Churchill was of course not just an observer, but also an actor during this tumultuous time. “The Gathering Storm” outlines the follies that allowed Hitler to rebuild the German war machine, harass and intimidate his neighbors, slowly plunge the world into another war, and attempt the extermination of a race. Meanwhile the world (League of Nations) did nothing, and in some ways facilitated him in his cause.

Churchill was one of the few who early on understood Hitler’s evil nature. And later he would also be correct in his assessment of Stalin, Why? Because Churchill was a historian and statesmen, not a politician!

In Vol. 1, Churchill makes his aim very clear, “It is my purpose, as one who lived and acted in these days, to show how easily the tragedy of the Second World War could have been prevented.” And then he sets out to do so: denial, appeasement, weakness, and wishful thinking (to summarize him). Today we can see some comparison with certain events and developments. I’m not going to go into any more detail on that.

Finally, a book I have had for some time and finally got around to reading, W. Cleon Skousen’s The 5000 Year Leap: A Miracle That Changed the World.

I love this book. It’s message is simple, yet important and the presentation is very effective. I also teach American Government and if it were up to me, I’d scratch our current 1996 book (yes it’s that old) and use this one for the class.

The miracle that was the founding of this country and the principles that made up that founding represent one of the truly magnificent developments in human history. Has our struggle to live up to these principles been one of total enlightenment? No, not always, and sometimes not even close. But it has been a wonderful experiment thus far, and one that has spread liberal democracy throughout the world and has improved the condition of humankind.

The assault on Fort Blakely was the last significant battle of the Civil War and that in and of itself makes it an important historical event. However, there is a subplot to the battle that perhaps takes on an even greater importance. Involved in the assault were 5,500 Negro soldiers, the largest such gather at any one time in the Western theater. Not only was it the largest, it was not made up of freedmen, but ex-slaves. These soldiers were brought along not as laborers, but as fighters. Additionally, there were reports of atrocities being committed by the black troops once they entered the fort. One who witnessed the event wrote that the Negroes could not contain their enthusiasm once inside the fort as it “was unbound,” he said, “and they manifested their joy in every conceivable manner.” Yet another white soldier noted that the blacks did not “take a man” and killed all they captured.

Though exaggerations, to be sure, it is interesting that not a lot has been written about this important event and what happened during the confused and volatile minutes after the Fort was taken.

For example, in Joseph Glatthaar’s study of Negro involvement in the Civil War, “Forged in Battle”, he offered only a brief reflection of the racial elements involved. Glatthaar noted pithily that the Negroes “charged without orders” and that after getting inside the fort they acted “similarly” to Nathan B. Forrest’s men at Fort Pillow. (An excellent article about the racial issue at Fort Blakely by Michael W. Fitzgerald titled “Another Kind of Glory: Black Participation and its Consequences in the Campaign for Confederate Mobile,” in the Alabama Review (Oct 2001) must be mentioned as my inspiration to write this. I quoted from it in my book and my treatment of this battle.) Historians have thus far either treated the racial elements involved at Fort Blakely with kid gloves, or have virtually ignored it.

—-

Brig. Gen. John P. Hawkins commanded the Negro division of 5,500 strong. The column consisted of 3 brigades and 9 regiments as follows:

Brig. Gen. William A. Pile commanded First Brigade, made up of the Seventy-third, Eighty-second, and Eighty-sixth U.S. Colored Infantry. Col. Hiram Scofield was in charge of Second Brigade, consisting of the Forty-seventh, Fiftieth, and Fifty-first U.S. Colored Infantry. Finally, Col. Charles W. Drew led the Third Brigade and its three units, the Seventy-sixth, Forty-eighth, and Eighty-sixth U.S. Colored Infantry.

Hawkin’s division was part of Maj. Gen. Frederick Steele’s “Pensacola Column.” As Canby ascended up Fish River into the underbelly of Spanish Fort, Steele’s column had a rough time of it marching from Pensacola to Pollard, Stockton, and then south into Fort Blakely.
The trek was arduous as they faced torrential rain, quicksand, mud, and had to build miles of corduroy roads. “ The heavy rain… rendered the roads almost impassable,” wrote Steele afterwards.

Steele’s multi-racial column throughout the campaign faced the harshest conditions.
Canby took the Thirteenth and Sixteenth corps up the Fish River and invested Spanish Fort. The 11th Wisconsin was among them. Steele headed toward Pollard as a faint to confuse the defenders of Mobile as to his real objective, Fort Blakely.

As Steele left Pollard it was reported that his Negro soldiers “devastated the country, burning houses and stripping the people, women and children, of every means of subsistence.” And if this was not enough to elicit response, it was recorded that the soldiers “often ravished the women.” All of these claims had the desired effect. Upon hearing of the arrival of Steele’s troops, Confederate General St. John Liddell made it known that any Negro soldier captured would be sentenced to death.

It is highly doubtful that the Negro soldiers in Steele’s column behaved in the manner described above. Union generals kept close tabs on the Negros and gave specific orders that were “very strict” in regards to the black soldiers. Foraging was not allowed, and their behavior, by most accounts, was exemplary.

By the time Steele invested Fort Blakely on April 3, 1865, tensions within the fort were high. Before his men knew of Steele’s arrival, Liddell informed them that the enemy they were about to face was “composed principally of negroes,” former slaves. He then stressed the “importance of holding their position to the last, and with the determination never to surrender.” The implication was clear.

As the Negro troops dug in and began to envelop their pray, it was noted that they were “burning with an impulse to do honor to their race.”

The stage was set for not just the last significant land battle of the Civil War, but one with significant racial dimensions that were perhaps not equaled at any other time during the war.

Up next, Part III

I have to agree with Kevin, and though I truly respect the Civil War Interactive’s Top 50 Civil War books declaration, I feel this new list is nothing but more of the same. I understand that a huge majority of Civil War enthusiasts are “battle narrative” folks, but does that mean that those are the best books? No, most popular? Probably. Yes the list is titled “Top 50,” but that implies the best.

There are excellent social historical works that are not on the list.  Too numerous to list. There are also numerous excellent non-battle narrative books not on the list and so many other excellent studies and even regimental histories also not listed. Mark Dunkleman’s work, Brother’s One and All, for one, is an incredible book and is easily one of the top 50, yet it is not there.

Their methodology is limited and therefore the validity is lacking and deserves scrutinty.  I understand that the goal was limited to a popularity contest, but that in itself is reason enough to dismiss it.

[Cross posted at 11th Wisconsin Civil War Regiment blog]

Well good, no great, news… after over a year since I sent the manuscript off to McFarland, The 11th Wisconsin in the Civil War: A Regimental History will be published shortly. I have returned the index and they are working on it now and expect it to go to the printer soon.

Lots of ups and downs throughout this process (which I will get into later, much later), but obviously I am very pleased and honored to be a published history author. I know that my work is of no great historical accomplishment, but nonetheless I am more than honored to bring to life the hardships and struggles of the men and boys of the 11th Wisconsin Regiment.

I have been published before, but that was in the entertainment industry and it always seemed a little, well, I’ll just say it did not make you feel like you had really accomplished anything.

For now, anyway, those interested in the book look for it to be out soon and thanks for your kind words and well wishes.

-Chris

This Republic of Suffering Death and the American Civil War. By Drew Gilpin Faust. 346 pages. $27.95. Alfred A. Knopf.

Americans had never endured anything like the losses they suffered between 1861 and 1865 and have experienced nothing like them since. Two percent of the United States population died in uniform – 620,000 men, North and South, roughly the same number as those lost in all of America’s other wars from the Revolution through Korea combined. The equivalent toll today would be six million.

Drew Gilpin Faust’s study of death and its impact on American society and culture is the second female authored book I’ve read, and the second I have been very pleased with.

All facets concerning how Americans dealt with death is covered in this very interesting work. Death’s impact on the soldier and society cannot be understated. Everything from the removal of millions of pounds of carcasses after each battle to shifting public opinion about the value of death is dealt with in Faust’s work.

Soldiers had to come to terms with the death of comrades and back home civilians had to do the same when it came to the loss of a loved one. In the words of the author, the war “victimized civilians as well as soldiers, and uncounted numbers of noncombatants perished as a direct result of the conflict.” [137]

If I have one complaint, and that is Faust, like virtually every other Civil War historian, fails to address how many civilian deaths were caused by the war. There are countless ways the war ravaged the South: disease, hunger, bushwhackers, atrocities, accidents, and numerous other “minor” events that were a direct result of the fighting. Perhaps such a study would be impossible. Nonetheless, Faust only offers James McPherson’s estimate of 50,000 civilian deaths, and nothing more.

Somehow, we need a better study or understanding of the loss of civilian life during the Civil War. I mean, how can we even discuss how total or hard the war was on civilians if we cannot even estimate (beyond a guess) how many civilians died?